Liberal MP David McGuinty talks with media in Ottawa on Wednesday, February 18, 2015. iPolitics/Matthew Usherwood

The government’s bill to create a new committee of parliamentarians tasked with scrutinizing the country’s national security agencies is set to be referred to committee Tuesday afternoon. And while Conservatives say they support the legislation’s intent, they won’t vote for it unless the government lets the committee pick its own chair.

“We would support C-22 if the government agrees to allow for the election of the chair,” said Larry Miller, deputy public safety critic for the Conservative party.

“It isn’t about the principle of the committee or what have you. We agree that it’s a good idea but it’s always traditional whenever you put a committee together, it’s voted on by the members of the committee, they elect the chair. And Mr. McGuinty — while I’ve nothing against Mr. McGuinty, I’ve got him on transport committee — he was appointed chair of this committee five months before C-22 even came about.”

The question of who gets to name the chair is one the Conservatives have been talking about for months now. Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale announced in January that Liberal Ottawa South MP David McGuinty would chair the national security committee; he brought McGuinty along for a trip to London that month to study the U.K.’s Intelligence and Security Committee.

But C-22 itself wasn’t tabled in Parliament until June, when the wording revealed the government’s specific vision of how the committee will look.

As it stands now, the legislation states that the committee will be made up of nine members — seven from the House of Commons and two from the Senate.

No more than four of the members from the House of Commons can be from the government side and all appointments will be made by the Governor in Council on the recommendation of the prime minister.

The committee was a hallmark of the Liberals’ 2015 campaign platform and part of its vision for reforming Canadian national security in the aftermath of the former government’s controversial Bill C-51, which expanded information sharing between government departments, criminalized the promotion of terrorist propaganda and gave the Canadian Security Intelligence Service new powers to disrupt plots rather than simply gather information about them.

Appointments to the committee will be made in consultation with opposition leaders, the legislation says. Miller said that even if Conservatives have to vote against the committee they won’t stop members from sitting on it.

“As long as Conservative members are represented on the committee we’ll support their appointment, no matter who it is,” he said.

While the NDP say the bill as it stands now has serious flaws, they will support it in principle on Tuesday with the goal of getting it before committee where they plan to introduce several proposals to amend the bill.

“Yes we’re going to support it on second reading despite serious problems,” said NDP justice critic and C-22 spokesman Murray Rankin.

Rankin, along with Conservative Erin O’Toole — currently on leave from his role as public safety critic to pursue the Conservative leadership but spoke as critic last week during debate on C-22 — stressed their concerns

Under the U.K. model, the prime minister’s nominees to the Intelligence and Security Committee must be confirmed in a vote by their respective houses of Parliament.

Until 2013, when that committee underwent significant changes to its scope and mandate, the prime minister had appointed the chair.

Now, the chair is elected by the committee, and Rankin said the government should learn from that committee’s recent adjustments.

“These reforms are simply not reflected in the bill before us today, and I do not understand why,” he said in his speech during debate on the bill last week. “The British committee was in fact in Ottawa last week, and its chair warned us to work hard to earn public trust. We do not want to repeat the errors of our allies; we need to learn from them.”

Rankin, who formerly served as legal counsel to the Security Intelligence Review Committee and is also a Special Advocate appointed by former justice minister Rob Nicholson, said he believes there is serious work to do to make the committee the best it can be and that he hopes the government will be willing to consider the amendments opposition MPs bring to the table.

“Is this the committee Canadians deserve? No,” he said. “Can we fix it? Of course we can.”

iPolitics reached out to Goodale’s office to clarify why they have decided to use an appointed chair instead of an elected one.

Scott Bardsley, press secretary for the minister, said the idea came from the initial iteration of the UK committee and he said there is potential for the committee to evolve over the coming years.

“The government modeled the ‎design of the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians after the United Kingdom’s successful model, which included a chair appointed by the Prime Minister when it was first established,” he said. “We envision the committee evolving over time as it comes into its own.”